Ncaa Sanctions and Paying Players: Should This Be Allowed?

A customer walks into the local Pizza Hut, and sits down. A waiter approaches and asks what kind of pizza they want. The customer gives his order to him, and lays 200 dollars under the menu. The waiter notices, and takes the money. The customer’s pizza is 10 dollars, and he pays for it by a debit card. When he leaves, he puts 300 dollars under his own plate. The waiter grabs the money, places the money in his pocket, and goes back to working. Now, if two new characters illustrated the names of the waiter and the customer for the football player, and an athletic booster, then everyone would be saying how rude it is, and how corrupt our society is. That is an exact reason why we shouldn’t pay players, and how the sanctions that the NCAA has put down to prevent the main sanction (paying players) from happening. Paying players to play an athletic sport in the NCAA should not be allowed, and that’s because colleges aren't allowed/shouldn't pay players and they don't need to earn money. There are many arguments against paying players The first argument, “Colleges aren't allowed/shouldn't pay players" has many opinionated answers, are biased, or have no clue of what's going on. In some past research, there have been some points that have been made that they should be paid. Others, for instance, show that they shouldn't be paid. There’s been that they’re getting free academics, free board, free meal, etc. and there’s also seen that full-ride scholars can't have a full-time job, so they could use some money. Both, I agree with, but in general, they shouldn't be paid, but there should be some rule changes. What I'm saying is, is that you notice smaller schools getting hit with the sanctions. For instance, Southern Methodist University, in the 80's, paid 21 football players over $61,000 to play for them over 3 years. If you notice, there is a rule that you can't pay players to play NCAA Football. To pay college athletes to play football for you is illegal. They tried to...

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

...during the early 2nd century AD, possibly as early as the year 105 A.D.,[1] by the Han court eunuch Cai Lun, although the earliest archaeological fragments of paper derive from the 2nd century BC in China.[2]
The modern pulp and paper industry is global, with China leading production and the United States behind it.To make pulp from wood, a chemical pulping process separates lignin from cellulose fibers. This is accomplished by dissolving lignin in a cooking liquor, so that it may be washed from the cellulose fibers. This preserves the length of the cellulose fibers. Paper made from chemical pulps are also known as wood-free papers–not to be confused with tree-free paper. This is because they do not contain lignin, which deteriorates over time. The pulp can also be bleached to produce white paper, but this consumes 5% of the fibers. Chemical pulping processes are not used to make paper made from cotton, which is already 90% cellulose.
The microscopic structure of paper: Micrograph of paper autofluorescing under ultraviolet illumination. The individual fibres in this sample are around 10 µm in diameter.
There are three main chemical pulping processes. The sulfite process dates back to the 1840s, and it was the dominant process before the second world war. The kraft process, invented in the 1870s and first used in the 1890s, is now the most commonly practiced strategy. One advantage is a chemical...

...Should College Athletes be reimbursed for Their Efforts?
My fellow classmates, there is an issue that must be presented to all of you. College athletes: should they be paid for what they do? The answer is simple: yes college athletes should be reimbursed for their efforts. The NCAA (National Collegiate Athletic Association) basketball athletes are being treated like slaves. They do all of the work, they might get a little reward, but they usually get nothing. Why should college athletes get paid for what they do? It is very simple, they work very hard, the NCAA makes a lot of money, and many scandals can happen if they are not paid. These players are considered amateurs but they perform just like the professionals.
Firstly, if the NCAA pays their athletes, they will need a lot of money. Fortunately they already have a lot of money. Other then merchandise sales, there are four ways that the NCAA makes money. They get majority of their revenues with broadcasting rights. Revenues are the collective items or amounts of income of a person, a state, etc (http://dictionary.reference.com). The NCAA has a very strong partnership with CBS and Cable Turner Sports. During March of 2012 the March Madness (A tournament by the NCAA) games were broadcasted on four channels. CBA has been with the NCAA for...

...﻿Should Hockey Players Be Allowed To Fight?
There is a lot of speculation about whether or not fighting in hockey should continue to be allowed or if it should be banned from the game and punished highly. Personally I have always believed that fighting is a large part of hockey. In a game where it is already quite easy to sideline another players career by even just a perfectly clean body check players need to know that there are players there that will make you pay for that big hit. Hockey is a game of passion but not as many fights start by players who are just upset and want to attack someone. Most fights end with the players making sure the other guy is alright and them laughing about it. Also it is huge to the ratings and the fan base. It can also just be for the fans enjoyment or for fun for the players. And If they want to do it they should be able to. Especially if there are referees there to make sure it stays safe. If someone starts losing to a large extent it is over. The referees will break it up immediately.
I believe there are several reasons for fighting in hockey. A main one is to protect your star players. If there was no fighting in hockey there would virtually be no stars left. Wouldn’t you take out the best player if you could do it legally in...

...Dumornay 1
Dumornay, Joab
Dr.Rose
AP English
5/29/13
NCAA or NBA
The National basketball association is the worlds premiere basketballs association. Basketball players from around the world come to showcase their talent on the NBA’s stage. The sport of basketball is played by people of all ages, sexes, and races especially the youth. The youth of all nations have grown found to the sport of basketball and the NBA has inspired many young kids to follow their dreams and become NBA players as they hope to win NBA championships and and NBA honors such as the most valuable player award(MVP). In the past the NBA has drafted exceptional high school players into the league but that has changed as the NBA modified their regulations to say for all draft picks to be at least 19 years of age and have spent a year out of high school. This regulation directly sends high school players to at least a year of college meaning a year away from their dreams of being a NBA player. From their controversy arises as the question is asked should the NBA draft high school players? I say no I believe the NBA should not draft high school, however there are pros and cons to both sides of the argument and there are NBA players that are proven examples of both sides of the argument.
Dumornay 2
Even though There...

...Outline
Purpose: The purpose of this speech is to inform my audience about the issue of potentially paying college athletes so that they may make an informed decision themselves.
Thesis: As the popularity, and revenue continues to grow in college sports, the debate will be taken to new heights about whether or not college athletes are being exploited, and if they should be compensated monetarily.
I. (C)The National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) defines amateurism as, “The conviction that people should participate in sports as a hobby (for the fun of it) rather than for money.” The NCAA mandates that all college athletes maintain this level of amateurism while in college, however, college sports have never been more of a cash cow than right now. Both ratings and revenue are at peaks never seen before at this level. (A) So can we really call these athletes amateurs if they generate this much money? As the popularity, and revenue continues to grow in college sports, the debate will be taken to new heights about whether or not college athletes are being exploited, and if they should be compensated monetarily. (M) I conducted an interview with current UMD Athletic Director Josh Berlo to gain an expert perspective on this topic. (P) In this speech, I will explore both sides of this...

...practice they must be committed to their sport. This means student athletes must make their sport their second full time job, their first full time job is their schooling. Division 1 football players spend 43.3 hours a week practicing, and basketball players spend 39 hours a week practicing. All of the dedication goes unnoticed, however all of the university employees and school programs make money off of the student athletes hard work and dedication. All college athletes should be paid a portion of all revenues, which can accumulate over a billion dollars that are either donated by boosters, merchandise sold, ticket sales, and TV franchising.
The common argument to college athletes being paid is that they are “Student Athletes.” Taylor Branch the writer of The Shame Of College Sports agrees that the NCAA makes “Student Athletes” sign a Student Athlete Statement. “The Student Athlete Statement that NCAA rules requires be collected yearly from every college athlete, in signing the statement, the athletes attest that they have amateur status, that their stated SAT scores are valid, that they are willing to disclose any educational documents requested and so forth. NCAA says that the athletes do not have any propriety rights (Branch 14). It is ludicrous to think that the students are amateurs; all college athletes have been playing their sport for at least 14 years plus...

...Should Gay Marriage be allowed?
Ken Smith
Grantham University
Should Gay Marriage be allowed?
Gay marriage continues to be a hot topic of discussion in the United States. Proponents and opponents can argue for their position based on many things. This paper will briefly discuss some of the common issues to consider when answering, “Should Gay Marriage be allowed?”
Many people still argue that on religious grounds gays and lesbians are sinful, and/or that marriage is a religious institution, essentially concerned with reproduction. They also believe that this institution can only be between a man and women and is as old as the book of Genesis. In Leviticus, God says not to lie (have sex with or love) a man as you would with a women. He includes homosexuals with thieves and drunkards. If he will not permit thieves and drunkards into heaven and he groups homosexuals with them does this mean that they will not be afforded the opportunity to go to heaven? Most religious groups believe that America is, or should be, in some fundamental sense, a Christian nation, whose laws and social structures spring from, or at least don’t openly contradict, Christian scripture. As of Nov 7, 2012, gay marriage has been legalized in the following nine states: Massachusetts (May 17, 2004), Connecticut...

...Biology
Should human cloning be allowed?
Questions started with a sheep named Dolly. Dolly was a clone sheep born on February 12th 1997. Ever since Dolly has existed scientist across the globe have been studying cloning and we are now presents with the question, should human cloning be allowed?
In order to debate the potential of human cloning, we must first consider how it ties in to certain aspects of human society. In society today, public opinion about human cloning is divided. The supporters for human cloning argue that human cloning should be allowed, as the research may have to potential to eliminate many of the world's problems such as animal extinction and can also benefit mankind in many ways. On the other hand, the opposes of human cloning say that cloning is unethical and that we should not be defying the very foundation of natural creation.
If human cloning were to undergo technological advances, the study of health would also drastically improve. Cloning would provide better research capabilities for finding cures to many present-day diseases.
Reasons for allowing human cloning:
Infertility: In my opinion, if a couple is unable to conceive a child, then there are plenty of children in orphanages and foster care that could use a home and family. Adopting an orphan is much easier, cheaper, virtuous, and safer solution than trying to clone a human...